The Senate approved by 29 votes in favor and 3 abstentions the project that defines the meat concept and prohibits giving that name to products that are not of animal origin. The motion passed to the Chamber of Deputies.
Substantively, the text seeks to ensure that what is sold as meat really is, not opening the space for substitutes. This establishes that in the event that a product incorporates other ingredients, it is expressly indicated.
The Senate Agriculture Commission studied the motion, introducing changes, hence now the deputies must review these changes in the next stage after the February legislative recess.
“By the name meat, we understand the edible part of the muscles of slaughter animals such as cattle, sheep, pigs, horses, goats, camelids, and other species suitable for human consumption,” the project states.
The denominations associated with products of animal originsuch as “hamburger”, “chorizo”, “sausage”, “cecina” or others, cannot be used to describe, promote or market food products containing higher proportion of matter of plant origin than meat, unless they expressly, visibly and unequivocally indicate that they are of plant origin.
The president of the Agriculture Commission, Iván Flores, reported the rule explaining that “we see that commerce and websites offer products called meat, which has a vegetable origin, lentil, soy, chickpea and others, that is why we want to clarify this confusion ”.
In the debate, parliamentarians reflected on the importance of giving consumers clarity about what they buy. It was also specified that “the intention is not to go against people who avoid eating meat, but to inform in the correct way about what is offered to the public.”
A certain strangeness was also seen that this type of matter requires a law. Faced with this, the president of the Agriculture Commission explained that “given the delay that exists in the issuance of regulations by various ministries, especially Health, we decided to present this standard.”
Likewise, the proposal was applauded considering the certainty it also provides to meat producers who, on more than one occasion, have shown certain unfair competition of the industry that generates plant foods that are sold as proteins classified as meat.
The Senate approved by 29 votes in favor and 3 abstentions the project that defines the meat concept and prohibits giving that name to products that are not of animal origin. The motion passed to the Chamber of Deputies.
Substantively, the text seeks to ensure that what is sold as meat really is, not opening the space for substitutes. This establishes that in the event that a product incorporates other ingredients, it is expressly indicated.
The Senate Agriculture Commission studied the motion introducing changes, hence now the deputies must review these changes in the next stage after the February legislative recess.
“By the name meat, we understand the edible part of the muscles of slaughter animals such as cattle, sheep, pigs, horses, goats, camelids, and other species suitable for human consumption,” the project states.
The denominations associated with products of animal originsuch as “hamburger”, “chorizo”, “sausage”, “cecina” or others, cannot be used to describe, promote or market food products containing higher proportion of matter of plant origin than meat, unless they expressly, visibly and unequivocally indicate that they are of plant origin.
The president of the Agriculture Commission, Iván Flores, reported the rule explaining that “we see that commerce and websites offer products called meat, which has a vegetable origin, lentil, soy, chickpea and others, that is why we want to clarify this confusion ”.
In the debate, parliamentarians reflected on the importance of giving consumers clarity about what they buy. It was also specified that “the intention is not to go against people who avoid eating meat, but to inform in the correct way about what is offered to the public.”
A certain strangeness was also seen that this type of matter requires a law. Faced with this, the president of the Agriculture Commission explained that “given the delay that exists in the issuance of regulations by various ministries, especially Health, we decided to present this standard.”
Likewise, the proposal was applauded considering the certainty it also provides to meat producers who, on more than one occasion, have shown certain unfair competition of the industry that generates plant foods that are sold as proteins classified as meat.
The Senate approved by 29 votes in favor and 3 abstentions the project that defines the meat concept and prohibits giving that name to products that are not of animal origin. The motion passed to the Chamber of Deputies.
Substantively, the text seeks to ensure that what is sold as meat really is, not opening the space for substitutes. This establishes that in the event that a product incorporates other ingredients, it is expressly indicated.
The Senate Agriculture Commission studied the motion introducing changes, hence now the deputies must review these changes in the next stage after the February legislative recess.
“By the name meat, we understand the edible part of the muscles of slaughter animals such as cattle, sheep, pigs, horses, goats, camelids, and other species suitable for human consumption,” the project states.
The denominations associated with products of animal originsuch as “hamburger”, “chorizo”, “sausage”, “cecina” or others, cannot be used to describe, promote or market food products containing higher proportion of matter of plant origin than meat, unless they expressly, visibly and unequivocally indicate that they are of plant origin.
The president of the Agriculture Commission, Iván Flores, reported the rule explaining that “we see that commerce and websites offer products called meat, which has a vegetable origin, lentil, soy, chickpea and others, that is why we want to clarify this confusion ”.
In the debate, parliamentarians reflected on the importance of giving consumers clarity about what they buy. It was also specified that “the intention is not to go against people who avoid eating meat, but to inform in the correct way about what is offered to the public.”
A certain strangeness was also seen that this type of matter requires a law. Faced with this, the president of the Agriculture Commission explained that “given the delay that exists in the issuance of regulations by various ministries, especially Health, we decided to present this standard.”
Likewise, the proposal was applauded considering the certainty it also provides to meat producers who, on more than one occasion, have shown certain unfair competition of the industry that generates plant foods that are sold as proteins classified as meat.
